ATF Final ruling for Private Made Firearms - Page 2

Armory » General Firearm Discussion

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - ATF Final ruling for Private Made Firearms (Page 2 of 2)

Posted: 4/25/2022 8:13:58 AM EDT

[#1]

Quote History

Quoted:
I recommend you re-read it, because it's extremely clear that AR15 uppers are not considered firearms. There is a specific reply to a comment in support of the original reply that states ATF still doesn't consider aluminum lowers with no machining or indexing in the fire control pocket to be firearms. IIRC it's somewhere around page 120.

The new rules suck and will hopefully get tossed in court.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

No 80% receivers are not out, they have to be serialized and transferred through a FFL, recorded on a 4473 which is retained for eternity by the ATF (Eventually). So what are the incentive to completing a 80% receiver if you can buy a completed receiver for petty much the same cost or less
(Companies have stripped lowers on sale a lot of times for $50 to $60) So the 80% receiver is basically dead. The rules have changed to make uppers and slides firearms also and subject to a 4473 and background check, so uppers or slides can no longer be shipped to your residence, but to a dealer after 17 August 2022. If you want to build a homemade gun after the rules are in place you will have to machine all the parts, receiver, fire control, and bolt or slide from scratch because they want all separate fire control parts under the definition of a firearm, subject to regulation.

And yes, I read the whole confusing and redundant final rule proposal. The reason I say proposal is it is not final if the Senate rejects it, but that has a slim chance because 17 August is before the mid-terms and the anti-gunners have the majority at this time. ATFs stance is you don't like it, take them to court and maybe in 10 to 20 years you can have it overruled, look at the bump stock litigation right now.

I recommend you re-read it, because it's extremely clear that AR15 uppers are not considered firearms. There is a specific reply to a comment in support of the original reply that states ATF still doesn't consider aluminum lowers with no machining or indexing in the fire control pocket to be firearms. IIRC it's somewhere around page 120.

The new rules suck and will hopefully get tossed in court.

Correct

Posted: 4/25/2022 8:15:41 AM EDT

[#2]

Quote History

Quoted:

No, they don't.

No, they don't.
If and when built into a firearm frame or receiver, THEN they must be marked with a serial# by the FFL who acquires it.

ATF doesn't get my 4473's until I go out of business. After twenty years I can destroy them.
For those building guns from an 80%........who cares? You built the gun, transferred it through an FFL who serializes it and off it goes to a buyer who will fill out the 4473 with his info. Why do you care about that 4473?

Some like to build period. Having a firearm witout a serial# makes some people happy.
Frankly, most 80%'s look like hot garbage to me and I'll never buy one.

Horseshit.

Nope. Know how we know you haven't read, much less understand what ATF is proposing?

It's not confusing.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

No 80% receivers are not out, they have to be serialized

No, they don't.

and transferred through a FFL,

No, they don't.
If and when built into a firearm frame or receiver, THEN they must be marked with a serial# by the FFL who acquires it.

recorded on a 4473 which is retained for eternity by the ATF (Eventually).

ATF doesn't get my 4473's until I go out of business. After twenty years I can destroy them.
For those building guns from an 80%........who cares? You built the gun, transferred it through an FFL who serializes it and off it goes to a buyer who will fill out the 4473 with his info. Why do you care about that 4473?

So what are the incentive to completing a 80% receiver if you can buy a completed receiver for petty much the same cost or less
(Companies have stripped lowers on sale a lot of times for $50 to $60) So the 80% receiver is basically dead.

Some like to build period. Having a firearm witout a serial# makes some people happy.
Frankly, most 80%'s look like hot garbage to me and I'll never buy one.

The rules have changed to make uppers and slides firearms also and subject to a 4473 and background check, so uppers or slides can no longer be shipped to your residence, but to a dealer after 17 August 2022.

Horseshit.

If you want to build a homemade gun after the rules are in place you will have to machine all the parts, receiver, fire control, and bolt or slide from scratch because they want all separate fire control parts under the definition of a firearm, subject to regulation.

Nope. Know how we know you haven't read, much less understand what ATF is proposing?

And yes, I read the whole confusing and redundant final rule proposal.

It's not confusing.

This is the way

Posted: 4/25/2022 8:21:22 AM EDT

[#3]

Quote History

Quoted:

You can't make them to sell. If in 5 years your buddy at the range wants to buy it from you, have at it. Start cranking out cast lowers or welding AKs together & selling them at a booth at the next gun show will draw significant ATF attention.

View Quote

That makes sense.
Thanks.

Posted: 4/25/2022 9:28:03 AM EDT

[#4]

What FFL is going to pay +100 dollars to have a PMF marked so they can put it on the used gun rack to sell as a homemade frankengun?

The buck stops at the ffl, they have to mark it with their contact data

I have doubts a shop is going to pay a premium for an 80 percent lower
and then pay in time or money to have it marked for inventory.

they will just contract a manufacturer to have a run of marked complete lowers to inventory in the shop

Any hobby gun builders will not be able to drop off an unmarked PMF for gunsmith services

Any lower with 1/16 inch high lettering that appears to be properly marked will be assumed to be legit

There will be epic dremel jobs

NO RAGRETS 15
BLUEBALL PA.
S.N. FUAR0CK87

Posted: 4/25/2022 11:18:18 AM EDT

[#5]

Quote History

Quoted:
What FFL is going to pay +100 dollars to have a PMF marked so they can put it on the used gun rack to sell as a homemade frankengun?

The buck stops at the ffl, they have to mark it with their contact data

I have doubts a shop is going to pay a premium for an 80 percent lower
and then pay in time or money to have it marked for inventory.

they will just contract a manufacturer to have a run of marked complete lowers to inventory in the shop

Any hobby gun builders will not be able to drop off an unmarked PMF for gunsmith services

Any lower with 1/16 inch high lettering that appears to be properly marked will be assumed to be legit

There will be epic dremel jobs

NO RAGRETS 15
BLUEBALL PA.
S.N. FUAR0CK87

View Quote

The BATFE want FFL's to mark 80% and homebuilt firearms that are kept overnight and thus added to inventory, thinking they will get a whole bunch of home builds added to their registry, but most hobby builders know enough just from building their guns that they can fix any problem that arises, and have been doing so for years. The BATFE isn't going to get what they want out of this, and it won't survive the courts in any case.

Posted: 4/25/2022 11:54:45 AM EDT

[#6]

But only criminals and extremists are interested in Ghostguns

Posted: 4/25/2022 12:18:40 PM EDT

[#7]

Quote History

Quoted: But only criminals and extremists are interested in Ghostguns

View Quote

You're clearly an extremist b/c you're interested in Ghostguns.

Posted: 4/25/2022 1:00:55 PM EDT

[#8]

If i put a boogaloo logistics engraving on a ghost gun it becomes + 4 for whaling

Posted: 4/25/2022 2:19:40 PM EDT

[#9]

Quote History

Quoted:

The BATFE want FFL's to mark 80% and homebuilt firearms that are kept overnight and thus added to inventory, thinking they will get a whole bunch of home builds added to their registry, but most hobby builders know enough just from building their guns that they can fix any problem that arises, and have been doing so for years. The BATFE isn't going to get what they want out of this, and it won't survive the courts in any case.

View Quote

Not to mention that most FFLs already won't touch an 80%.

Posted: 4/25/2022 8:42:25 PM EDT

[#10]

Quote History

Quoted:
But only criminals and extremists are interested in Ghostguns

View Quote

The so-called "ghost funs" are used in less than 1/2 of 1% of murders, but the federal gov is exerting all this effort to make home build kits have serial numbers, all so they supposedly can trace the weapons used in crimes to their last legal owner, as if that even solves crimes.

This rule is a crock of shit and will do nothing to reduce crime. That isn't its intent, either.

Posted: 4/25/2022 8:58:47 PM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:

Yet, it is.....Administrative Procedure Act
It's part of any gov agencies rulemaking authority.

View Quote

From Wikipedia (the be-all end-all) regarding the APA:
The separation of powers doctrine is less of an issue with rulemaking that is not subject to trial-like procedures. Such rulemaking gives agencies more leeway in court because it is similar to the legislative process reserved for Congress. The courts' main role is then to ensure that agency rules conform to the Constitution and the agency's statutory powers. Even if a court finds a rule unwise, it will stand as long as it is not "arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with the law."

Sounds like 'shall not be infringed should be easily challenged.

Posted: 4/25/2022 9:13:53 PM EDT

[#12]

Quote History

Quoted:

From Wikipedia (the be-all end-all) regarding the APA:
The separation of powers doctrine is less of an issue with rulemaking that is not subject to trial-like procedures. Such rulemaking gives agencies more leeway in court because it is similar to the legislative process reserved for Congress. The courts' main role is then to ensure that agency rules conform to the Constitution and the agency's statutory powers. Even if a court finds a rule unwise, it will stand as long as it is not "arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with the law."

Sounds like 'shall not be infringed should be easily challenged.

View Quote

Filing a challenge is easy peasey.
Finding a sympathetic federal judge isn't.